Effects of nucleotide supplementation on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, and immune blood profiles related to foot-and-mouth disease in vaccinated growing pigs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A 6 wk trial was conducted to evaluate the effects of nucleotide supplementation in improving performance, nutrient digestibility, and immune blood profiles so as to reduce foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) vaccine stress in growing pigs. A total of 120 growing pigs [(Yorkshire × Landrace) × Duroc] with an average body weight (BW) of 25.76 ± 1.83 kg were used. Pigs were allocated to one of three treatments (eight pens per treatment; three barrows and two gilts per pen) based on BW and sex. Pigs were injected with FMD vaccine at 84 d of age (2 wk after experiment started). Dietary treatments consisted of (1) CON: corn–soybean-meal-based diet, (2) NUC1: CON + 0.5% nucleotide, and (3) NUC2: CON + 1.0% nucleotide. In the current study, the growth performance of gain:feed ratio (G:F), the apparent total tract digestibility of dry matter and nitrogen was linearly (P < 0.05) increased with the increasing level of nucleotide. After injection, the concentration of cortisol and epinephrine was decreased (P < 0.05) linearly in nucleotide treatments. In conclusion, nucleotide supplementation to FMD vaccinated pigs showed positive effects on improving performance, immune system health, and reducing vaccine stress in growing pigs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".